388 fflSTORY OF GREECE. And though, for the last century and a half, the verdict of the jury has been free as to matters of fact, new trials having taken the place of the old attaint, yet the ascendency of the presiding judge over their minds, and his influence over the procedure as the authority on matters of law, has always been such as to overrule the natural play of their feelings and judgment as men and citizens,! sometimes to the detriment, much oftener to the benefit — always excepting political trials — of substantial justice. But in Athens, the dikasts judged of the law as well as of the fact : the laws were not numerous, and were couched in few, for the most part familiar, words. To determine how the facts stood, and whether, if the facts were undisputed, the law invoked was properly applicable to them, were parts of the integral ques- tion submitted to them, and comprehended in their verdict: moreover, each dikastery construed the law for itself, without be- ing bound to follow the decisions of those which had preceded fined for giving verdicts against plain evidence and the directions of the court." Compare Mr. Amos's Notes on Fortescue, De Laudibus Legum Anglise. c. 27. ' Respecting the French juries, M. Cottu (Reflexions snr la Justice Crim- inale, p. 79) remarks : — " Le de'sir ardent de bien faire dont les jures sont generalement animes, ct la crainte de s'egarer, les jette dans une obeissance passive ci I'impulsion qui leur est donnee par le president de la Cour d' Assise, et si ce magistral sait s'emparer de leur estime, alors leur confiance en lui ne connoit plus de homes. lis le consid6rent comme I'etoile qui doit les guider dans I'obscur- ite qui les envu-onne, et pleins d'un respect aveugle pour son opinion, ils n'attendent que la manifestation qu'il leur en fait pour la sanctionner par leur declaration. Ainsi au lieu de deux juges que I'accuse devoit avoir, il n'en a biep souvent qu'un seul, qui est le president de la Cour d' Assise." Anselm Feuerbach (in the second part of his work, Ueber die OefFent- lichkeit und Miiudlichkeit der Gerechtigkeitspfiege, which contains his review of the French judicial system, Ueber die Gerichtsverfassung Frank-> reichs, Abt. iii, H. v, p. 477) confirms this statement from a large observa- tion of the French courts of justice. The habit of the French juries, in so many doubtful cases, to pronounce a verdict of guilty, by a majority of seven against five, in which case the law threw the actual condemnation upon the judges present in court, direct- ing their votes to be counted along with those of the jury, is a remarkable proof of this aversion of the jury to the responsibility of decision ; see Feuerbach, ibid. p. 481, seqq. Compare also the treatise of the sama author, Betrachtnngen iiber das Geschwomcn Gericht. pp. 186-193.
